uneblinstu's post game chatter: ed 6, vol 13: Iowa

[uneblinstu]

New Year's Eve stream of consciousness:

 

- Decent start, but Shields still missing opportunities at the rim. Had 7-6 lead and a couple of opportunities. Not loving the rim enough.

- Huskers survived the early part of the game.

- Shields in his own head a bit.  But a big 3 at the end of the shot clock to get it back to one.

- Petteway trying to take it over a bit. Bad decision on the three, that’s gonna happen at times.

- Impressive 13-1 run to build the lead but got a little loose with the ball to let Iowa and their crowd back in it.  A little immaturity there.

- Biggs making a difference offensively. I like watching him attack a defense.  Couple sloppy defensive mistakes.

- Young guns got schooled a bit taking the ball to rim.  Gotta finish strong at this level.

- Webster clearly playing with more assertiveness, but needs to figure out how to finish at the rim. I like the direction he’s headed.

- Both teams were fairly sloppy in the first half.  

- Suprised at how many minutes Hawkins got in the first half.

- Why can’t the Huskers finish at the rim? Is it a mentality thing?

- Rebounding a bit better in the first half than I expected.

- Huskers scored 1 point the final 6:54 of the first half.

- Like the mentality the Huskers came out with in the second half.

- But Iowa responded building lead to 10.

- Missed free throws from Biggs, Marble dunk, wild lay-up from Biggs, three point play, forced 3 might be final dagger for NU.

- Gallegos a no-show?  C’mon man...

- Petteway with another solid performance.

- Though Pitchford was better today, but still got a long way to go.

- Biggs was bothersome between the under 8 and under 4 media time outs.  He’s a little maddening of a player, but I wonder if he deserves the start over Webster or Ray. He’s bringing more than either right now.

- Just when all looked lost, the Huskers clawed their way back in.  Nice fight from the Huskers, but too big a hole. There’s a lot to build off of tonight, though.

[49r]

I mentioned it in the game thread but I noticed Smith leaving the game with a bit of a hitch in his giddyap.  Never came back in.  I think his absence was huge during that crucial stretch when Iowa built their big lead.  Hope he's okay, cause we are gonna NEED that kid this year.

[PAhusker]

More D Nasty, less Hawkins. Happy new year

[Huskerpapa]

We hung tough, but once again we must turn to the little things that we failed to do during most of the game.  We are on that edge.  Iowa was a good team that played average or below.  We could have had these guys and let it slip through our hands.  That said, Petteway, Walter, Tai and Biggs met or exceeded expectations.  Shavon was hit and miss.  His game is getting close.  It does appear that Leslee suffered some sort of injury.  Ray, we need you bud.  You can't just show up.  We need your leadership, we need your defense, we need some scoring. 

 

Man, I was frustrated for a long time, but I am glad we fought to the end. 

[Huskerpapa]

Amen Walter, A-flippin-men.

 

walter pitchford ‏@Takeflight35 3m

13 and 12? I'll exchange that with a win because a win is what matters #gbr

[throwback]

Smith's injury apparently was an ankle - Coach Miles says he's unsure how bad it is for going forward, but Smith was unable to go back in at all when Miles asked him to

 

Miles said on the post game we missed 9 layups, it felt like double that.

 

The defense was more than good enough to win tonight, got to figure out how to finish at the rim - I agree Iowa could have been had tonight, we just weren't quite good enough

 

Some good things to build on, as we showed plenty of toughness on the boards and on defense. And I loved the way we fought back because it looked like we were headed for a 25-30 point loss, but we may have let one get away tonight

[Huskerpapa]

Honestly, I also loved how the ref's let them play for the most part.  Hope that type of refereeing continues.

[49r]

Amen Walter, A-flippin-men.

 

walter pitchford ‏@Takeflight35 3m

13 and 12? I'll exchange that with a win because a win is what matters #gbr

 

Yep.  Amen indeed.

 

Love the team attitude, but we still need that kind of production from him consistently in order to get those wins.

[Norm Peterson]

OK, a couple of stat lines:

 

2 pts; 4 assists; 4 steals; 2 turnovers.

 

7 pts; 3 assists; 2 steals; 3 turnovers.

 

The top line is arguably better.  Neither blow you away.  If I told you one was from a freshman and the other a sophomore, you wouldn't sneer at either line too much.  But the bottom line certainly isn't soooo outstanding that you lose any sleep that we didn't land the kid from South Sioux and got the kid from New Zealand instead.

[tcp]

tai's shots will eventually fall. he's turning it around a bit right now, even if slowly. I like that Miles is hanging in there with him.

[The_Vault]

Amen Walter, A-flippin-men.

 

walter pitchford ‏@Takeflight35 3m

13 and 12? I'll exchange that with a win because a win is what matters #gbr

Who actually posts their stat line after a loss? I'm sorry but I am not a fan of Pitchford. 

[REDZONEDAN]

 I interpret that tweet as him being a team first player. I see no problem with his tweet.

[49r]

Here is the postmortem from the SB Nation blogs.

 

First, from Corn Nation:  http://www.cornnation.com/2013/12/31/5262492/huskers-drop-b1g-opener

 

And second, from Black Heart Gold Pants:  http://www.blackheartgoldpants.com/2013/12/31/5262484/iowa-nebraska-basketball-recap-12-31-13

[uneblinstu]

The guy from Corn Nation gave better answers in the Q&A than he did in putting that write-up together. Must have had a NYE party to get to.

[throwback]

So did anyone watch the replay and count how many layups we missed/had blocked? I thought about it, but decided to watch football instead - not sure I could count that high anyway, that would have been a fingers AND toes number. 

 

I think Barfknecht said in his post game article the stat sheet said we missed 15 layups. If it was more than that, I wouldn't be surprised. Ugh. Hopefully we can finish those better Saturday in Columbus.

[Huskerpapa]

I had counted 12...but 15 is likely the accurate figure.  All I know is that if we hit just half of them, it becomes a much different game.

[hhcmatt]

 

Amen Walter, A-flippin-men.

 

walter pitchford ‏@Takeflight35 3m

13 and 12? I'll exchange that with a win because a win is what matters #gbr

Who actually posts their stat line after a loss? I'm sorry but I am not a fan of Pitchford. 

 

 

That was the best effort I saw from Pitch this season.

If that's him humble bragging, I'll take it with that effort.

[Cheap Seat Perspective]

 

Amen Walter, A-flippin-men.

 

walter pitchford ‏@Takeflight35 3m

13 and 12? I'll exchange that with a win because a win is what matters #gbr

Who actually posts their stat line after a loss? I'm sorry but I am not a fan of Pitchford. 

 

I completely agree Vault. 

 

 

 I interpret that tweet as him being a team first player. I see no problem with his tweet.

 

Then why post your stats? When I first read it, it just rubbed me the wrong way. If the wins all that matters say we didn't get it done tonight, still working to get better or something. I don't like the humble brag. 

[a0t0w0]

I don't follow Walt, but it's not uncommon for players to tweet personal stats. 

 

The people following Walt are going to be friends, family and fans.  They are interested enough to follow him, so why wouldn't they be interested in how he's playing?

 

140 character PSA and he managed to comment on his game as well as make a diplomatic statement.    

[throwback]

I had counted 12...but 15 is likely the accurate figure.  All I know is that if we hit just half of them, it becomes a much different game.

Agree - at half I was thinking we could have just as easily been up 7 as down 7. Unfortunate to not capitalize on our really good defensive effort & effort on the boards, but hopefully the guys gained confidence that they can play with the better teams on the schedule.

[hugh42]

So did anyone watch the replay and count how many layups we missed/had blocked? I thought about it, but decided to watch football instead - not sure I could count that high anyway, that would have been a fingers AND toes number. 

 

I think Barfknecht said in his post game article the stat sheet said we missed 15 layups. If it was more than that, I wouldn't be surprised. Ugh. Hopefully we can finish those better Saturday in Columbus.

 

I re-watched the game yesterday.  The 'layups' were all highly contested except 2, maybe 3 (Petteway blew a bunny, Pitchford on the missed follow dunk and Shields rushed a shot that he didn't have to).  Several of the 'layups' were tips as well and Iowa's players had as much to do with the misses as we did IMO.

[Huskerpapa]

 

So did anyone watch the replay and count how many layups we missed/had blocked? I thought about it, but decided to watch football instead - not sure I could count that high anyway, that would have been a fingers AND toes number. 

 

I think Barfknecht said in his post game article the stat sheet said we missed 15 layups. If it was more than that, I wouldn't be surprised. Ugh. Hopefully we can finish those better Saturday in Columbus.

 

I re-watched the game yesterday.  The 'layups' were all highly contested except 2, maybe 3 (Petteway blew a bunny, Pitchford on the missed follow dunk and Shields rushed a shot that he didn't have to).  Several of the 'layups' were tips as well and Iowa's players had as much to do with the misses as we did IMO.

 

My only argument is that in the game of basketball, very few shots (with the exception of breakaways and free throws) are uncontested.  But if you go strong to the hole, you should be able to finish or get fouled.  We are missing the shots AND we are not getting fouled.  That is telling me that they are simply "misses."  And we should not be missing those bunnies.  Not now, not ever. 

[hugh42]

 

 

So did anyone watch the replay and count how many layups we missed/had blocked? I thought about it, but decided to watch football instead - not sure I could count that high anyway, that would have been a fingers AND toes number. 

 

I think Barfknecht said in his post game article the stat sheet said we missed 15 layups. If it was more than that, I wouldn't be surprised. Ugh. Hopefully we can finish those better Saturday in Columbus.

 

I re-watched the game yesterday.  The 'layups' were all highly contested except 2, maybe 3 (Petteway blew a bunny, Pitchford on the missed follow dunk and Shields rushed a shot that he didn't have to).  Several of the 'layups' were tips as well and Iowa's players had as much to do with the misses as we did IMO.

 

My only argument is that in the game of basketball, very few shots (with the exception of breakaways and free throws) are uncontested.  But if you go strong to the hole, you should be able to finish or get fouled.  We are missing the shots AND we are not getting fouled.  That is telling me that they are simply "misses."  And we should not be missing those bunnies.  Not now, not ever. 

 

 

You may have noticed I said 'highly contested'.  Yes, the shots were missed, but you act as if the opponent had nothing to do with it. 

[Huskerpapa]

 

 

 

So did anyone watch the replay and count how many layups we missed/had blocked? I thought about it, but decided to watch football instead - not sure I could count that high anyway, that would have been a fingers AND toes number. 

 

I think Barfknecht said in his post game article the stat sheet said we missed 15 layups. If it was more than that, I wouldn't be surprised. Ugh. Hopefully we can finish those better Saturday in Columbus.

 

I re-watched the game yesterday.  The 'layups' were all highly contested except 2, maybe 3 (Petteway blew a bunny, Pitchford on the missed follow dunk and Shields rushed a shot that he didn't have to).  Several of the 'layups' were tips as well and Iowa's players had as much to do with the misses as we did IMO.

 

My only argument is that in the game of basketball, very few shots (with the exception of breakaways and free throws) are uncontested.  But if you go strong to the hole, you should be able to finish or get fouled.  We are missing the shots AND we are not getting fouled.  That is telling me that they are simply "misses."  And we should not be missing those bunnies.  Not now, not ever. 

 

 

You may have noticed I said 'highly contested'.  Yes, the shots were missed, but you act as if the opponent had nothing to do with it. 

 

Perhaps that was the takeaway from my last comment, but not what I said in an earlier comment on this same subject.  To paraphrase, I speculated on the outcome of the Iowa game if we had made even 50% of those shots.  Sure, some will be the result of a good defensive effort; but we, as a team, need to become more aggressive in our finishes.  We are going to be involved in a number of close games in this league.  The differences in these games could very well be how we adjust to these "contested shots" as we move forward. 

 

And...if you notice the body language of the players (and coaches) after some of these misses, I think they agree as well.  Just saying...

[throwback]

 

 

 

So did anyone watch the replay and count how many layups we missed/had blocked? I thought about it, but decided to watch football instead - not sure I could count that high anyway, that would have been a fingers AND toes number. 

 

I think Barfknecht said in his post game article the stat sheet said we missed 15 layups. If it was more than that, I wouldn't be surprised. Ugh. Hopefully we can finish those better Saturday in Columbus.

 

I re-watched the game yesterday.  The 'layups' were all highly contested except 2, maybe 3 (Petteway blew a bunny, Pitchford on the missed follow dunk and Shields rushed a shot that he didn't have to).  Several of the 'layups' were tips as well and Iowa's players had as much to do with the misses as we did IMO.

 

My only argument is that in the game of basketball, very few shots (with the exception of breakaways and free throws) are uncontested.  But if you go strong to the hole, you should be able to finish or get fouled.  We are missing the shots AND we are not getting fouled.  That is telling me that they are simply "misses."  And we should not be missing those bunnies.  Not now, not ever. 

 

 

You may have noticed I said 'highly contested'.  Yes, the shots were missed, but you act as if the opponent had nothing to do with it. 

 

And I didn't mean to give that impression when I asked the question - every team is going to miss a few of those inside, especially against a long & athletic team like Iowa. Their shot blocker whose name I'm drawing a blank on was really good. Love to see us have a guy like that guarding the rim.

 

But with our ability to get into the lane, we have to learn to finish a much higher percentage of those shots if we're going to end up where we want to. It almost seemed as if we were anticipating contact at times and just over-powered the shot. Maybe it's just going to take more time in the weight room to be strong enough to finish with contact so that we aren't anticipating it. Maybe it's more of a confidence thing that will come with more maturity, allowing us go inside with more power & draw a few more fouls. Maybe we have to be wiling to shoot the 5-to-7 foot floater inside the lane a little more often to draw that defense away from the rim.

 

And if we can start finishing inside, that's going to open the perimeter for Gallegos & maybe guys like Fuller down the road. 

 

Miles is certainly addressing it. I thought NU did a better job using shot fakes and trying to go off two feet to finish with more power against Iowa than we did vs Cincy. So I'm sure it'll get better. It was just frustrating to see a game like that where Iowa was ripe to get beat get away from us when we had a lot of misses from in the lane.